Forum Moderators: phranque
Interestingly there is also a similar law in the US.
How many of you are following it?
Just because you have a website does not mean that it has to be "accessible".
This is no different to the fact that billboard advertisments are not accessible to the blind.
What the law does mean is that if you provide a service that is only available through a website, or offer an incentive to your customers for using your website as opposed to some other form of contact with your company, then it must be accessible.
(Although this is of course my opinion only; the law as ever is vague - the RNIB have simply taken "website == service" and gone with it; without giving any justification for that opinion. I don't think that would hold in court.)
Some exceptions may be:
1) Paintings or ClipArt site (blind would not use this)
2) Music site (deaf would not use it)
However, you may find that a deaf person's relative likes a particular music band, so the deaf person wants to buy a CD for their relative as a present. Some deaf people cannot read English grammer very easily (try reading BSL - British Sign Language - and some of you will not understand it at all. You will recognise the words, but not the meaning.)
So it is a very difficult balance. Do we need to get all our pages translated into BSL or ASL (American Sign Language) grammer? Do all sites need to be accessible to the blind?
I would expect most should and have no valid reason for not complying with this law to the extent that they can.
I just wish that the people making the laws would put a bit more thought into how they are going to enforce the laws before they draft them.
But then most of our lawers still think of The Beatles as a 'modern beat combo' - so what chance have we got;)
I think this rulling will be close to impossible to manage though. I think it is more of a case of trying to ensure companies act on this out of courtousy.
Mack.
